Business and labor leaders and government insider panelists agreed that the U.S.-China trade war will be difficult to unravel, but disagreed on how quickly Democrats could -- or should -- resolve outstanding issues on the NAFTA rewrite. The trade panel Oct. 10, hosted by Fiscal Note, included Clete Willems, former White House deputy assistant to the president for international economics, who said that although it pained him to say it, "The political conditions in both countries are just not conducive to the big deal."

The Commerce Department’s Oct. 9 blacklisting of several Chinese technology companies may not impact trade negotiations this week but could lead to significant retaliation against U.S. companies, trade experts said. And while the Trump administration insisted the Entity List decisions were unrelated to trade talks with China, the move unnerved U.S. companies impacted by the trade war that fear Commerce’s announcement could expedite the release of China’s so-called "unreliable entity list."

Chinese technology companies and the country’s foreign ministry criticized the U.S.’s decision to add 28 Chinese entities to the Commerce Department’s Entity List, a move that could lead to countermeasures, China said. China denied the allegations in Commerce’s announcement that it was involved in human rights violations of the country's Uighur population and urged the U.S. to “immediately” withdraw the Entity List additions, which it called “serious violation[s]” of international norms. “China will continue to take firm and powerful measures to resolutely safeguard national sovereignty, security and development interests,” a foreign ministry spokesperson said during an Oct. 8 press conference, according to an unofficial translation of a transcript.

Export Compliance Daily is providing readers with some of the top stories for Sept. 30 - Oct. 4 in case they were missed.

The Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security added 28 entities to its Entity List for their involvement in human rights violations of China’s Uighur population, BIS said Oct. 7. The entities include Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region People’s Government Public Security Bureau, 18 of its subsidiaries and eight China-based technology and science companies, including Hikvision, a major supplier of video surveillance products. The announcement takes effect Oct. 9.

The U.S. and Japan officially signed their initial trade deal during a brief signing ceremony at the White House on Oct. 7, setting up a potential Jan. 1 effective date. The text of the new deal is now posted to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative's website. So is the text of a concurrent deal on digital trade.

The State Department should revamp several aspects of its draft guidance for exports of surveillance technology (see 1909040071) because some of it is “troubling,” “overly broad” and may unnecessarily restrict exports, the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation said in comments.

The U.S. government lacks technical knowledge and a single, leading voice in its approach to technology competition with China, said Adam Segal, the emerging technologies chair at the Council on Foreign Relations. Segal, speaking during an Oct. 4 Brookings Institution panel about the U.S.-China technology relationship, said U.S. industries are concerned that technology policies, such as certain export controls, are being made without a full understanding of their impacts.

U.S. sanctions on two large shipping companies last month disrupted the tanker market, forcing oil traders to cancel bookings and causing rates to spike as they searched for other ships, according to a September post from Clyde & Co.

Sanctions officials are sometimes unable to judge the effectiveness of the Trump administration's sanctions regimes, the Government Accountability Office said, pointing to the difficulty of tracing the effects of sanctions and the administration's constantly changing foreign policy goals. Officials said it is sometimes impossible to determine whether U.S. sanctions are the only or even the “most significant” reason for a foreign country changing its behavior, the report said. They also said U.S. policy goals can change while a sanctions regime is still active, “making it difficult to measure sanctions’ effectiveness in achieving any ultimate policy objective.”